Addendum_Forthcoming:Monster Hunter is one of the games that you're best jumping into the latest iteration. It tends to add more weapons, new customization options, updates snd tweaks monster fighting anilities and qualities. Revamps and creates emtirely new map and monster interactions.

It's nowhere near as bad as dynasty warriors (1 thru 8) ...

I will say Monster Hunter is like no other game series, really. It's like Dark Souls in that you have deliberate actions and i-frames you need to take advantage of, but not really.

All the weapons handle very differently, damage to different parts of the monster's body breaks off monster parts, cuts off tails, staggers and topples them.

You also have far more tricks up your sleeve. Like barrel bombs, sonic bombs, etcs. Moreover in the harder quests, you often get interactions between larger monsters on the same map that might surprise you and your hypothetical group as you're playing.

It lends itself to 'calculated chaos' ... pre-mission planning, in-fight operations and juggling healing, evasion, knowing when to take advantage, and active disruption... like stopping a monster recharge by eating prey when it gets tired.

It's a player skill-centric RPG. Where simply knowing the monster you're facing, and knowing the maps you're traversing, is more important than your equipment (beyond the power curve that is). So action is periodically intense, tactical, and isn't like anyother game I can think of... but also punctuated by buckets of nuance and environmental interplay.

Solo is fine, and the games often offer 'offline story-esque' quest series but co-op is where it shines. And I love local co-op. That's just me. Playing where you can actually talk to eachother in realtime, laugh, and tease eachother for fainting is awesome.

But there is, in most games, stuff you won't likely beat only Solo.

Ok, thanks for the info. I've considered picking up one of the 3DS games a few times, but always got sidetracked by some other new release that was more a sure thing in terms of me liking it.

Anyway, since there's a roughly July to October gap in the Switch release schedule where there's nothing coming out that really tickles my fancy, I might try something new and give Generation Ultimate a shot. Or maybe Monster Hunter World, should the PC version hit by then.

Chimpzy:Ok, thanks for the info. I've considered picking up one of the 3DS games a few times, but always got sidetracked by some other new release that was more a sure thing in terms of me liking it.

Anyway, since there's a roughly July to October gap in the Switch release schedule where there's nothing coming out that really tickles my fancy, I might try something new and give Generation Ultimate a shot. Or maybe Monster Hunter World, should the PC version hit by then.

From what I've gathered on the Reddit. World is more accessible to newcomers and has a lot of quality of life improvements. But has less overall content since they can't reuse things quite as well as they apparently did across the 3ds games, having to recreate the monster roster.

Chimpzy:Ok, thanks for the info. I've considered picking up one of the 3DS games a few times, but always got sidetracked by some other new release that was more a sure thing in terms of me liking it.

Anyway, since there's a roughly July to October gap in the Switch release schedule where there's nothing coming out that really tickles my fancy, I might try something new and give Generation Ultimate a shot. Or maybe Monster Hunter World, should the PC version hit by then.

MHW is okay... but ... ehhh.

I play a fair bit of MH solo and online, but if you're a gregarious creature like me (at least most of the time) you want that portability andcapacity for co-op.

Monster Hunter is like ... the perfect portable game. It can be played in bursts, and the gameplay really lends itself well to social gaming with other people in a room. Because you're all going to be laughing, cheering, ribbing eachother, and discussing what weapons you should bring to the fight.

It just hits that sweet spot.

Sure you could theoretically do thesame with a gaming laptop but do you really want to lug that thing around to just game with others? That being said, boardgaming and P&P rpgs are my first and second favourite types of gaming. Horse racing and videogaming is equal third.

Chimpzy:Ok, thanks for the info. I've considered picking up one of the 3DS games a few times, but always got sidetracked by some other new release that was more a sure thing in terms of me liking it.

Anyway, since there's a roughly July to October gap in the Switch release schedule where there's nothing coming out that really tickles my fancy, I might try something new and give Generation Ultimate a shot. Or maybe Monster Hunter World, should the PC version hit by then.

If I was going to make an overall comparison, World is Street Fighter IV while Generations Ultimate is Street Fighter III or Alpha. It's not as newbie friendly, but it's more complex and has a lot more depth to it. The thing about World is that it's paced and designed differently than Generations is. World has more of the sandbox approach, but Generations' maps (like the series up until then) instead has a large maps divided between a dozen interconnected maps. Furthermore, its portable design lends itself better to short play sessions. There is also no using items while moving so it is a LOT more challenging and methodical. They are also way more monsters to fight. And there's the obvious advantage of portability and the fact that you can do local multiplayer with other Switches.

Then there are the big changes. The first are the Hunter Arts, super moves that the player builds meter with. Their properties can range from powerful attacks to buffs to even healing. The biggest difference by far is the Styles system, six different play methods that allow the player to choose how they want to fight. Guild is the standard, balanced one, Striker is a simplified one that allows the players to equip up to three Hunter Arts, Aerial lets the player vault whenever they want in order to mount monsters, Adept is set up around counterattacks, Valor is this weird one set up around going into a super mode, and Alchemy which is a support type suited for multiplayer. And if that's not enough, you can even play as one of the Palicoes (the helper cats. Seriously)

So overall, World is more newb friendly while Generations Ultimate is more challenging but has more complexity to it. It's a matter of taste. I personally preferred Generations because I like the Styles and Hunter Arts.

So, a quick run down:* I don't get to keep any of the 'free' games they're 'giving' me.* The plan doesn't seem to include any real, meaningful community features.* The Virtual Console is dead.* I'll still have to rely on those fucking Friend Codes.* No way to directly message friends, or even interact in any meaningful way.* I'll still have to use that bafflingly stupid mobile app bullshit to get any sort of voice chat going in online games.* I have to pay $20 for this shit.

So, a quick run down:* I don't get to keep any of the 'free' games they're 'giving' me.* The plan doesn't seem to include any real, meaningful community features.* The Virtual Console is dead.* I'll still have to rely on those fucking Friend Codes.* No way to directly message friends, or even interact in any meaningful way.* I'll still have to use that bafflingly stupid mobile app bullshit to get any sort of voice chat going in online games.* I have to pay $20 for this shit.

So, a quick run down:* I don't get to keep any of the 'free' games they're 'giving' me.* The plan doesn't seem to include any real, meaningful community features.* The Virtual Console is dead.* I'll still have to rely on those fucking Friend Codes.* No way to directly message friends, or even interact in any meaningful way.* I'll still have to use that bafflingly stupid mobile app bullshit to get any sort of voice chat going in online games.* I have to pay $20 for this shit.

So, a quick run down:* I don't get to keep any of the 'free' games they're 'giving' me.* The plan doesn't seem to include any real, meaningful community features.* The Virtual Console is dead.* I'll still have to rely on those fucking Friend Codes.* No way to directly message friends, or even interact in any meaningful way.* I'll still have to use that bafflingly stupid mobile app bullshit to get any sort of voice chat going in online games.* I have to pay $20 for this shit.

Pretty sure it works like PS+ does. You get to keep the redeemed Xbox One games but you can't play them while you are not subscribed. That means that when you resubscribe, the games be available to you again. The 360 games are yours even after you unsubscribe.

So, a quick run down:* I don't get to keep any of the 'free' games they're 'giving' me.

You don't to keep any of the 'free' games that Sony or Micrsoft give you either lol.

And did I say I was okay with Live or PSN? Have I EVER, in the entirety of the many years I've been on this forum, once said I was okay with paying for PSN or Live?

I'll answer that for ya. No, I haven't. I've never even suggested that I would be okay with it.

I mean, I get that you have some weird, self-imposed vested interest in defending all of the baffling, scummy, and/or stupid things Nintendo does, often rationalizing them away as though they're 'bad' when other companies do them but 'okay' when Nintendo does, but it's getting to the point that all you do anymore is project onto others. You're not even attempting legitimate counter-criticisms anymore, you're 'attacking' them based on shit they haven't even said.

And, as rumor has it, both drastically limiting the storage space available and forcing limits on save file size.

It's like Nintendo was dragged into the modern age kicking and screaming. And then, as if to lash out at the industry in some desperate bid of spite, they said, "Fine! We'll 'modernize'. But fuck you if you think we'll be smart about it or do it fairly!"

Vigormortis:often rationalizing them away as though they're 'bad' when other companies do them but 'okay' when Nintendo does,

which is funny because it's only not ok when Nintendo something like this according to you and most other people on this forum.

everyone is content with Sony and Microsoft charging the player for online and has been for over a decade now. Nintendo gets in on it though? "HOW DARE THEY!"

Vigormortis:Have I EVER, in the entirety of the many years I've been on this forum, once said I was okay with paying for PSN or Live?

I'll answer that for ya. No, I haven't. I've never even suggested that I would be okay with it.

you don't need to say it. your actions speak louder than words. you'll give Nintendo crap for doing it but not once have i ever seen you shit on Microsoft and Sony when they've been charging customers out the ass for more than a decade now.

alot like how your default is to never directly reply to me, nah, you'd just rather comment about me and insult me through badmouthing me to someone else who actually is talking to me.

you've always had a problem with me but you've never actually spoken to me directly have you? if i pm you would that help you get things off your chest and sort your issues with me? i mean you've been doing this for years now. you seem to hate me alot for some strange unexplained reasons lol

Yoshi178:which is funny because it's only not ok when Nintendo something like this according to you

For fuck's sake, dude. When have I ever said that? At what point, in my entire history of being on this forum, have I said it's 'okay' for Sony or Microsoft or anyone to charge to play online?

and most other people on this forum.

Where? No, seriously, where? Point me to the post(s) that say, quote, "It's okay for Sony/Microsoft/whoever to do this thing but it's bad for Nintendo to do it!"

You constantly make this claim, but I'm yet to see a single comment that says anything even remotely close to that. So please, provide a link to one of these infamous posts.

everyone is content with Sony and Microsoft charging the player for online and has been for over a decade now.

This is so demonstrably false I can't even begin...

Nintendo gets in on it though? "HOW DARE THEY!"

Yes. That's clearly the issue people are bringing up. It's certainly not the:* Lack of dedicated voice chat, save for the use of some bafflingly stupid mobile app bullshit.* Lack of any community features AT ALL. uPlay, of all things, has more community features. AND IT'S FREE.* Hard limits on save backups, of which are behind a paywall.* No way to direct message other users.* Still being forced into reliance on friend codes.* The cancellation/removal of the Virtual Console.* The lack of a dedicated lobby system.

And this isn't even touching on the lack of things like Twitch integration or other, modern features.

No. It's clearly just people bitching that Nintendo dared to join the online gaming thing. Yep. You nailed it.

you don't need to say it. your actions speak louder than words. you'll give Nintendo crap for doing it but not once have i ever seen you shit on Microsoft and Sony when they've been charging customers out the ass for more than a decade now.

it's only not ok when Nintendo does it.

Oh, I'm sorry. I was unaware that I had to actively go around, injecting myself into topics of conversation unrelated to Sony or Microsoft, and loudly proclaim my disdain for their paid online services, and that if I didn't I was clearly condoning their business practices. My mistake.

I've 'shit on' Live and PSN a lot in conversations on this forum. That I'm not sucking Nintendo's dick with unbridled praise does not mean I'm not critical of other companies who commit similar practices.

Vigormortis:No. It's clearly just people bitching that Nintendo dared to join the online gaming thing. Yep. You nailed it.

well that's pretty childish. how about actually providing some constructive criticism rather than just mindlessly bitching?

Vigormortis:You're not even attempting legitimate counter-criticisms anymore, you're 'attacking' them based on shit they haven't even said.

Jesus, dude. What the actual fuck?

not really. i wasn't attacking them at all.

i'm just pointing out that if you're going to *bitch" at Nintendo for doing this, you may as well just go and bitch at Sony & MS for doing exactly the same thing, and they've encouraged Nintendo to do it in the first place since they've been doing it for years now.

i don't like paying for any of the online service's. but i'm not going to throw a tantrum about it either. i've actually been an Xbox live customer for years. i used to love playing Halo wars all the time on 360 online.

Fiz_The_Toaster:Okay, get back to the topic at hand and stop bickering. If there are anymore posts that continue to down this path of insults I will hand out infractions and this thread will be locked.

Fiz_The_Toaster:Okay, get back to the topic at hand and stop bickering. If there are anymore posts that continue to down this path of insults I will hand out infractions and this thread will be locked.

You have been warned.

So, just so I'm clear, does this mean I'm not allowed to address any of the points Yoshi178 has brought up or accusations he's pointed at me? Because I have no intention on 'bickering' and no intention on resorting to similar petty insults, but would like to address his post, the contents therein, and tie them back to my original comments on Nintendo's online service. Yet, I feel that doing so, based on your comment, would net me a warning, even though I'm not the one insulting other posters.

Which, if the case, seems incredibly unfair. That a fellow poster gets to throw out insults and baseless accusations, but I have to just shut up and take it.

Fiz_The_Toaster:Okay, get back to the topic at hand and stop bickering. If there are anymore posts that continue to down this path of insults I will hand out infractions and this thread will be locked.

You have been warned.

So, just so I'm clear, does this mean I'm not allowed to address any of the points Yoshi178 has brought up or accusations he's pointed at me? Because I have no intention on 'bickering' and no intention on resorting to similar petty insults, but would like to address his post, the contents therein, and tie them back to my original comments on Nintendo's online service. Yet, I feel that doing so, based on your comment, would net me a warning, even though I'm not the one insulting other posters.

Which, if the case, seems incredibly unfair. That a fellow poster gets to throw out insults and baseless accusations, but I have to just shut up and take it.

:/

I'm not stopping anyone from continuing on previous conversations, but what I am stopping is the passive aggressive and rude posts that seem to be going on in this thread.

You are more than welcome to continue on with your conversation as long as you can be civil, which is all I'm asking.

Fiz_The_Toaster:Okay, get back to the topic at hand and stop bickering. If there are anymore posts that continue to down this path of insults I will hand out infractions and this thread will be locked.

You have been warned.

So, just so I'm clear, does this mean I'm not allowed to address any of the points Yoshi178 has brought up or accusations he's pointed at me? Because I have no intention on 'bickering' and no intention on resorting to similar petty insults, but would like to address his post, the contents therein, and tie them back to my original comments on Nintendo's online service. Yet, I feel that doing so, based on your comment, would net me a warning, even though I'm not the one insulting other posters.

Which, if the case, seems incredibly unfair. That a fellow poster gets to throw out insults and baseless accusations, but I have to just shut up and take it.

:/

i haven't insulted you at all in this thread. if anything you're the one that insulted me with:

I mean, I get that you have some weird, self-imposed vested interest in defending all of the baffling, scummy, and/or stupid things Nintendo does

I like Sterling videos and I'm a regular consumer, but I feel the one instance he's forgetting is the fact that if the Switch is going to survive as a social gaming platform, it needs to make server costs as low as possible for third party offerings.

The Switch has had an impressive sales year, but total units are lower than the PS4. Secondly, third party developers want to oversee numerous ways to monetize their products going online. Nintendo relinquishing control over its online environment, and charging a service cost to make it as cheap as possible to design on its online space is basically trying to attract more third party developers.

Which is what everyone was demanding. Kind of important to remember that...

So for $20 (a quarter or third of the price of competitors) means getting more online and social gaming support from third parties is the price to pay. Some of the stuff they offered was stuff that should have always been, but it's time to grow up. If Nintendo wants to get greater third party support, big or small, it needs to reduce the costs of operating on its online space.

And just remember ... that is what everyone was demanding... bit rich to complain now.

"Nintendo kept fucking over third party!"

"Here's an online service cost to incentivize third party development."

"FUUUUUUUUUUU NINTENDO!"

Not exactly helpful... And hey, I'll take a $20 hit compared to having a game I paid full price for like Vermintide on PS4 still be unplayable in any form if you don't have a PS+ account that costs 4 times as much.

I like Sterling videos and I'm a regular consumer, but I feel the one instance he's forgetting is the fact that if the Switch is going to survive as a social gaming platform, it needs to make server costs as low as possible for third party offerings.

The Switch has had an impressive sales year, but total units are lower than the PS4. Secondly, third party developers want to oversee numerous ways to monetize their products going online. Nintendo relinquishing control over its online environment, and charging a service cost to make it as cheap as possible to design on its online space is basically trying to attract more third party developers.

Which is what everyone was demanding. Kind of important to remember that...

So for $20 (a quarter or third of the price of competitors) means getting more online and social gaming support from third parties is the price to pay. Some of the stuff they offered was stuff that should have always been, but it's time to grow up. If Nintendo wants to get greater third party support, big or small, it needs to reduce the costs of operating on its online space.

And just remember ... that is what everyone was demanding... bit rich to complain now.

"Nintendo kept fucking over third party!"

"Here's an online service cost to incentivize third party development."

"FUUUUUUUUUUU NINTENDO!"

Not exactly helpful... And hey, I'll take a $20 hit compared to having a game I paid full price for like Vermintide on PS4 still be unplayable in any form if you don't have a PS+ account that costs 4 times as much.

Jim tends to forget a lot of things. Maybe he should let things simmer for a bit before rushing out a script because he's in a hurry to sound clever.

The thing is, this was probably always going to happen. It's not even necessarily about catering to third parties, because they're clearly doing that willingly. Steam has become such a mess that indie developers are turning out WAY more profit on the eShop and the Switch's success has basically made a lot of third parties come crawling back what with Dark Souls Remastered, Doom, Wolfenstein II, Monster Hunter Generations Ultimate, and so on. They've run out of excuses to ignore Nintendo. And, while this might shock certain people, the fact of the matter is Nintendo has steadily been increasing its online presence and that requires more people so they can maintain infrastructure and maintenance. Whining about a company making sure it doesn't bankrupt itself is insane behavior, especially when people can do the sensible, logical option: leave. Hanging outside, screaming at Nintendo all day is creepy, like a bitter man chucking rocks at his ex's window for moving on with her life.

Aiddon:the Switch's success has basically made a lot of third parties come crawling back what with Dark Souls Remastered, Doom, Wolfenstein II, Monster Hunter Generations Ultimate, and so on. They've run out of excuses to ignore Nintendo.

Uh, Monster Hunters been basically a nintendo exclusive for the last decade or so lol

Aiddon:the Switch's success has basically made a lot of third parties come crawling back what with Dark Souls Remastered, Doom, Wolfenstein II, Monster Hunter Generations Ultimate, and so on. They've run out of excuses to ignore Nintendo.

Uh, Monster Hunters been basically a nintendo exclusive for the last decade or so lol

Uh, Monster Hunters been basically a nintendo exclusive for the last decade or so lol

And how many thought it was never going to come West, especially after the release of World? Furthermore, it also shows that CAPCOM is probably not going to go away from Nintendo anytime soon in spite of World. Again, don't be in such a hurry just to get a quip off.

Aiddon:the Switch's success has basically made a lot of third parties come crawling back what with Dark Souls Remastered, Doom, Wolfenstein II, Monster Hunter Generations Ultimate, and so on. They've run out of excuses to ignore Nintendo.

Uh, Monster Hunters been basically a nintendo exclusive for the last decade or so lol

Monster Hunters only been a Nintendo exclusive since Monster Hunter 3 on the Wii.